[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-licensing
Subject:    Re: QPL still needed?
From:       Kevin Forge <forge () myrealbox ! com>
Date:       2003-04-08 22:33:59
[Download RAW message or body]

The LGPL is not a real option right now.  Those QT customers who don't 
think they need
support will be hapy to use it under the LGPL for all propriatery 
development.  

ante wrote:

>On Monday 07 April 2003 11:32, Matthias Ettrich wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Currently this isn't permitted by the GPL, but by the QPL:
>>
>>   "5. You may use the original or modified versions of the Software to
>>   compile, link and run application programs legally developed by you
>>   or by others."
>>
>>However, this could easily be achieved with a little addition to the GNU
>>GPL, practically the reverse case of
>>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WritingFSWithNFLibs
>>    
>>
>
>The GPL with such an exception makes a LGPL. A straight license - without an 
>exception - gives a clearer situation than a license with an exception. So, 
>the LGPL may be a better option. 
>
>This would be painless: keep the QPL, and add the exception to the GPL (or use 
>the LGPL). Over time developers will use the GPL+ (LGPL). 
>
>Then the QPL can be dropped. It is possible to make an exception then for 
>those who have rights under the QPL that they might lose. Just a transitional 
>exception. 
>
>Cordialemente,
>
>Ante
>
>
>
>******
>
>http://home.uwnet.nl/~vita
>
>
>
>
>  
>


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]